Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (65627)	9/29/1998 12:40:00 PM
From: greg s	Respond to of 186894

Mary: re:I just hope I didn't embarrass myself No way! I couldn't have said it better myself! Greg.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (65627)	9/29/1998 1:21:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary - Re: " So, while some pessimists and self proclaimed Analyst guru legend are examining ASP's in Celeron, Mendocino, sub $500 computers (yesterday's concerns), and whatever else that sounds good in a sound bite, Intel is gearing up for real growth." Thanks for the well-expressed thoughts. It is easy for others to find a myriad of reasons for Intel's eventual demise, but these folks never realize the real reasons for Intel's current success - and how it will lead to future success. Paul

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (65627)	9/29/1998 5:09:00 PM
From: GVTucker	Respond to of 186894

Mary, RE:<< I wrote the above as much in response to your post as it is to clarify for myself the reason(s) for my investment. I just hope I didn't embarrass myself before a lot very technically knowledgeable people.>> On the contrary, that may be the best written bull case I have seen. I don't agree, but your points are all valid.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (65627)	9/29/1998 8:06:00 PM
From: gnuman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, You work in marketing, right? ;-)

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (65627)	10/1/1998 4:44:00 AM
From: Joseph Pareti	Respond to of 186894

let's see ... you first buy Intel and THEN you want to persuade us all it was such a terrific idea, right ? with the same passion you seem to deploy in defense of the "honestly married citizens from the "immoralities" of Clinton " ... By the way, your buddies Gingrich & Co. may very well give the coup-de-grace to this moribund market if they keep pressing ahead with the impeachment nonsense.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (65627)	10/7/1998 1:47:00 AM
From: stak	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, First of all, let me say that it's nice to see you detour from your usual policy of not predicting the future. I appreciate your efforts to put your opinions in the public domain. >>These (Digital photography devices, appliances, set-tops, dumb terminals, various StrongArm app's, etc.), I believe, are just a side show. They will never exceed more than 10% of Intel revenue - but it will buy Craig Barrett some time and keep the nervous nellies and extreme pessimists (present company excluded) from dumping the stock. << This is the one that really shocks me. Just a side show?!? Do you believe that even in 5 years that this will account for only 3-5 billion of revenues for Intel (assuming Intel gets up to 30-50 billion of revenue)? If this is "just a side show" what is the main course for Intel? --The entire traditional PC market will almost disappear in a 5-10 year time frame.-- Are you penciling in huge revenue increases for servers by the year 2003??? That's a lot of eggs to put into one basket... What are other growth areas that you vision for Intel? Intel's new StrongARM chip architecture, acquired from Digital Equipment, will make Intel a player in handheld and TV set-top computers, said Craig Barrett, Intel's CEO and president, speaking at the Intel Developer Forum here. These are two markets where it has no real presence but which could turn into huge markets in the future. "The StrongARM is complementary to the Intel architecture. It is great for handheld devices, great for set-top boxes, great for [other] devices," Barrett said. "You can expect to see new [StrongARM] architectures roll out on a biannual basis." Intel's other chips also get an architectural refreshing every two years. Here's the link to full text article that includes Barrett's quote. news.com >>In five years time, I believe, Intel will be the dominant company in the computer industry for these reasons: Intel's dominant position will be spearheaded by the IA64 platform. Further, a lot more of the OS, Communications, and the more complex Applications software will be embedded in the hardware. As a consequence, I see Intel encroaching into territories that are now dominated by IBM (mainframes), Sun (WS and Servers), Cisco (communications), and Microsoft (OS software). Intel is more focused, has the financial muscle, and occupies the center, or middleground, to bring all these things together in a coherent manner - more so than any other company in the world today.<< How could Intel be "the" dominant company with almost no presence in software, content or services??? It needs a much greater voice in each of those areas going into the year 2000 and beyond. I agree with your opinion on Intel encroaching on "IBM (mainframes), Sun (WS and Servers)". However, regarding: Cisco (communications), and Microsoft (OS software) I'm not so clear. Could you be more specific on what Intel is doing to challenge Cisco and Microsoft? How is Intel going to get any bigger piece of the pie from Cisco? I just don't see it happening with the current strategy. Cisco's end-to-end solutions and customer service are far superior to Intel in the communications field. It's promising to see Intel link up with Redhat to add another O/S to the IA-64 universe. Do you know of any plans by Intel to get into software development for the IA-64? Will they ever come out with their own office suite or entertainment software? In a best case scenario I'd like to see Intel bundle an O/S with IA-64. Maybe not for free a la Explorer , but at a perhaps 90% discount to MSFT's O/S. Is this possible with Red Hat? Or another unified UNIX O/S? The proprietary UNIX O/S's will more than likely see their O/S share plummet anyway when MSFT goes 64 bit. Without a completely new strategy in software Intel doesn't look to encroach to a very significant degree revenue wise. >> sub $500 computers (yesterday's concerns)<< Out of curiousity, why is a product that hasn't come out yet yesterday's concerns? By 500$ computers, I also include the upcoming "computer like" appliances. stak